Last week heard 2 parables that Jesus told – the parable of the lost sheep and the lost coin – the third parable of the series, the lost son or prodigal son is skipped by the lectionary at this time.

Last week I suggested that Jesus was telling these parables to remind people that God is the seeker of the lost.  God does not give up and is willing to venture into dangerous places in order to find the one that is lost.  God expends a huge amount of energy turning the place upside down to find the one that is lost.  God is the relentless divine seeker, finding the lost.  The prevenient mercy that just keeps on searching. 

And when the lost is found God rejoices.  God rejoices.  God throws an OTT party – an over the top party.  The searcher, God, throws a party – the cost of which far outweighs the value of the thing that was lost if we want to take a purely economic view. 

God, however, does not play by our economic rules.  The lost, that is the poor, the outcast, the marginalised, and the sinners value is not measured by the same judgemental standards that we judge by.  For God all, each and everyone of us, is priceless.

I also suggested that Jesus was not just reminding people of what God is like but that it was a reminder that they, and we, are called to participate in this mission of God’s.  We are called to adopt the Kingdom of God or Culture of God economic principles. 

This morning we heard another parable that brings into question the economics of the Kingdom of God.

Often when we hear one of Jesus’ parables, we like to assign one of the character’s as representing God.  This character is the good guy.  But what do we do when neither of the characters are likeable?  When it is hard to figure out who the good guy is?  Is it the rich man or the manager?

This parable like the ones from last week is best understood when read in relation to the parable that the lectionary skips – the parable of the lost, or prodigal son.

The two parables have a number of similarities which we will explore.

The first similarity is that the manager is said to have squandered the possessions or resources that belonged to the master.  The prodigal son we are also told squanders property.

The manager is called to come before his master, the rich man, and is asked to give an account of his management – the books are being audited.  The manager knows that his job has ended. But before handing in the account he comes up with a plan to cook the books, to tamper with them to sure up his position.

This is the second similarity for both the manger and the prodigal son when faced with the dilemma of their destitution have a conversation with themselves saying “what am I going to do now? How will I get myself out of this predicament?  Ah I know what I will do…” And so a plan is set in place.

The prodigal son decides “I will get up and go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat me like one of your hired hands.”

The dishonest manager, deciding that he is in no shape for manual labour and has too much pride to beg, says “I have decided what to do so that, when I am dismissed as manager, people may welcome me into their homes.” Both of them devise a plan that will enable them to be accepted into homes that they might otherwise have not been welcome in. 

In a world where “social” welfare was quite literally “social” the relationships that you had, that is, who owed you or who you were on good terms with is what provided security.  And so the dishonest manager recognizes that he needs to do something drastic to secure his future and he moves ahead quickly with a plan to ingratiate himself by having those who owed money to his master slash the debt.

Amy-Jill Levine describes the manager as “a conniving, deceiving cheat … who gets what he wants through manipulation”.  Personally, I have thought the same of the prodigal son who’s repentance has always seemed rather contrived to me.

But both of these characters the dishonest manager and the prodigal son – both end up finding themselves treated far better than they expected or deserved.  This is the third similarity.

 

In the dishonest manager’s case, he is not only now in the good books with those whose debts he has written off, but the master commends him for his shrewdness, or his wise or prudent behaviour.  How outrageous!

Remember last week, the parables were being told in response to those who were grumbling and criticising Jesus for welcoming sinners, for consorting with people they had shunned and avoided as godless sinners and eating with them. 

We are used to seeing them in the whinging older brother who is oh-so-sure of his own righteousness and who resents mercy and hospitality being shown to the one who deserves it so much less. 

Are those grumblers also represented in this parable?  Are they the dishonest manager?

In such a reading, it is God who is the owner and who summons those who have been acting as his representatives in the world, and calls them to account for abusing their position and failing to properly care for what God had entrusted to them.

Elsewhere Jesus accuses the religious leaders of mismanagement.  Of having misconstrued God’s priorities and tying heavy burdens of impossible expectation on people.  Of caring more about the rules and sabbath breaking than caring about people, healing and reconciliation.

What does that mean for us?  God’s representatives in the world, the body of Christ, the Christian church?  How faithfully we have fulfilled our call to represent God in the world and steward the things God has entrusted to us? Have our behaviours and our attitudes and our obsessions represented God as abundantly loving and merciful and welcoming, or have they made people fear God and feel weighed down by debts to God that they can never repay?  Has the church been too focused on small things and small-minded rules” as it has obsessed over teachings on abortion, and homosexuality, instead of trying “to heal the larger wounds of society.”

The dishonest manager is commended for his shrewdness.  He is commended for cancelling the debts or forgiving the debts of others.  The Gospel writer, Luke repeatedly equates forgiving sin with forgiving financial debts. Luke’s version of the Lord’s Prayer says: “forgive us our sins, for we ourselves forgive everyone indebted to us.”  

Instead of keeping people bound in the debts they have accrued, the manager is setting people free.  

And sure, he might be doing it almost entirely out of self-interest, just like that younger prodigal bother, trying to make himself popular to secure his own future.   But he is commended by his master.  Does he do the right thing even if it is for the wrong reason?

We can accept doing the wrong thing for the right reason, having a good intention.  In 1 Samuel we are told that God sees our heart.  God knows our motivation.  If our motivation is good, we will be judged on that.  Here the motivation is not so good, but the outcome is still good.  So maybe the point is there is no bad reason to forgive. Forgive because that’s what God does. Forgive because you think it will make you popular. Forgive because you hope to be forgiven. Forgive because you have got caught out and you are desperate to get yourself out of a bind. Forgive for any reason at all, but forgive, forgive, forgive. That’s what Jesus is all about. Forgive for that is a faithful representation of God.

Forgive even when it seems the outrageous thing to do.  Insisting that every life has dignity, deserves freedom and is of unmeasurable value, is priceless, flies in the face of a limited-resources economy but this is the Good News of Jesus.  The Good News of the Kingdom of God and we are called to be part of setting people free.  We are called to demonstrate God’s love and help people to see that they are priceless, beloved children of God.  We are called to be part of heralding of God’s peace here on earth, God’s shalom – the well-being for all.  Part of the unfolding spiral of God reaching out to all.